↓ Skip to main content

Quantitative assessment of airborne exposures generated during common cleaning tasks: a pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health, November 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quantitative assessment of airborne exposures generated during common cleaning tasks: a pilot study
Published in
Environmental Health, November 2010
DOI 10.1186/1476-069x-9-76
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anila Bello, Margaret M Quinn, Melissa J Perry, Donald K Milton

Abstract

A growing body of epidemiologic evidence suggests an association between exposure to cleaning products with asthma and other respiratory disorders. Thus far, these studies have conducted only limited quantitative exposure assessments. Exposures from cleaning products are difficult to measure because they are complex mixtures of chemicals with a range of physicochemical properties, thus requiring multiple measurement techniques. We conducted a pilot exposure assessment study to identify methods for assessing short term, task-based airborne exposures and to quantitatively evaluate airborne exposures associated with cleaning tasks simulated under controlled work environment conditions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Colombia 1 1%
Nigeria 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 63 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 21%
Student > Master 12 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Professor 5 7%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 10 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 18 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 14 21%
Unknown 11 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 February 2020.
All research outputs
#881,657
of 14,473,946 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#204
of 1,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,894
of 110,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#10
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,473,946 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,161 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 110,433 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.